APPRAISAL FOR: KATHRYN HATTOX TRUST PROPERTY …€¦ · San Diego, CA 92107 Re: Appraisal of...

TITLE PAGE

APPRAISAL FOR: KATHRYN HATTOX TRUST

PROPERTY LOCATED AT:

3650 3rd Avenue

San Diego, California 92103

STEVEN L. BOWEN & ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS/CONSULTANTS

9522 SELTZER COURT, SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-3248 TELEPHONE (858) 571-9000 FAX (858) 571-9003 E-Mail: [email protected] Web Site: www.sandiegoappraisers.com

STEVEN L. BOWEN, MAI 2

Real Estate Appraiser/Consultant

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Steven L. Bowen, MAI

Rodney G. Bowen, Appraiser Gary J. Huneke, Appraiser

Kim S. Bowen, Appraiser October 16, 2017 Our Ref. No. 17-011

Sylvia Maas Kathryn Hattox Trust 4227 Coronado Avenue

San Diego, CA 92107

Re: Appraisal of Property located at 3650 3rd Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103

Dear Sylvia Maas: Pursuant to your recent request, please be advised that I have made a

careful investigation and analysis of the property at the above referenced location to determine the Market Value of the subject property.

By reason of my investigation and analysis, I have formed the opinion

that the subject property had a Market Value, as of April 29, 2017, under Limiting Conditions and Assumptions that follow, of:

$4,470,000 (FOUR MILLION FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS)

This appraisal report has been made in conformity with, and subject to,

the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

(USPAP) as provided by the Appraisal Foundation and is intended that the report comply with OCC, 12 CFR, Part 34.

Enclosed is pertinent information upon which my conclusion of value is

partially predicated. Thank you for the opportunity of submitting this report. If I can be of further service, please do not hesitate to call.

Respectfully submitted,

Steven L. Bowen, MAI CA Cert. No. AG002842



SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS LOCATION: 3650 3rd Avenue, San Diego, CA

92107

FLOOD ZONE: No, Panel No. 06073C1885G, Dated: 5/16/2012, Zone X, Insurance Not Required

TOXIC WASTE OR ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD POTENTIAL:

None noted

NATURAL, CULTURAL, SCIENTIFIC OR RECREATIONAL VALUE:

None noted

OWNER OF RECORD: Kathryn Hattox Trust

DATE OF VALUE: April 29, 2017

DATE OF REPORT: October 16, 2017

APPRAISAL USE: Estate purposes

SITE DATA: Area: 13,495 square feet Zone: RM-3-9, Multifamily Residential

IMPROVEMENTS: Type: 16 unit apartment complex Size: 11,962 square feet

Actual Age: 57 years Effective Age: 30 years Remaining Economic Life: 30 years

HIGHEST AND BEST USE: As currently improved

ESTIMATED MARKET TIME TO SELL: Less than 12 months assuming aggressive marketing

ESTIMATED EXPOSURE TIME: Same as market time

VALUE INDICATED BY THE TWO APPROACHES: Sales Comparison Approach: $4,280,000 Income Approach: $4,470,000

RECONCILED VALUE ESTIMATE: $4,470,000



LIMITING CONDITIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS

In the preparation of this report, certain basic Assumptions have been relied upon, and there are also certain limiting conditions which circumscribe the scope of this report.

1) That no guarantee is made as to the correctness of estimate or opinion furnished by others, and which have been used in making this appraisal. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for economic or physical factors occurring at some later date which may affect the opinion herein stated unless specifically noted.

2) Title to the property appraised is assumed to be marketable and free of encumbrances.

3) That no liability is assumed on account of matters of a legal nature affecting this property, such as title defects, liens, encroachments, overlapping boundaries, etc.

4) Maps, photos and plats furnished by the appraiser are not based upon a survey, but are furnished as an aid to the reader in visualizing the report.

5) Possession of this report, or any copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publications, nor may the same be used for any purpose by anyone but the client, without the previous written consent of the appraiser, and in any event, only in its entirety. Any party who uses or relies upon any information in this report, without the preparer's written consent, does so at their own risk.

6) A minimum standard fee will be charged per each half-day (or any portion thereof) for court appearance on half my standard daily rate as of the date service is rendered. Pre-trial preparation will be charged based on my hourly rate fee in effect the date service is rendered.

7) Since earthquakes and soil problems are common in California, no responsibility is assumed due to their possible effect on individual properties. The appraiser assumes that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property which would render it more or less valuable. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for such conditions or for engineering which might be required to discover such factors.

8) Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. The presence of potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired. It is possible that tests and inspections made by a qualified hazardous substance and environmental expert would reveal the existence of hazardous materials and environmental conditions on or around the property that would negatively affect its value.



9) The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") became effective January 26, 1992. I have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to determine whether or not it is in conformity with the various detailed requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey of the property, together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the ADA, could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the Act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property. Since I have no direct evidence relating to this issue, I did not consider possible non-compliance with the requirements of the ADA in estimating value of the property.



CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.

The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the

reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and

conclusions.

I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the

subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved.

I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity,

regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-

year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment.

I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this

report or to the parties involved with this assignment.

My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing

or reporting predetermined results.

My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon

the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent

event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.

My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report

has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of

this report.

Kim S. Bowen, appraiser assistant, assisted in the inspection, collection

of data, analysis, and valuation of this report. I have no bias with

respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. The reported analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and the report has been prepared, in

conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics & Standards of the Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute, which include the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal

Practice. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized

representatives.

The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and

this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice of the Appraisal Institute.



The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal

Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.

As of the date of this report, I, Steven L. Bowen, MAI, have not completed

the requirements under the continuing education program for Designated Members of the Appraisal Institute.

October 16, 2017

STEVEN L. BOWEN, MAI, CA Cert. No. AG002842 DATE



TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................. 1

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL .......................................................................... 2

SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS ................................... 3

LIMITING CONDITIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS ............................................... 4

CERTIFICATION........................................................................................... 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. 8

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 10

PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL ................................................................... 11

INTENDED USE ......................................................................................... 11

INTENDED USER....................................................................................... 11

DATE OF VALUE ....................................................................................... 11

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP .................................................................... 11

UNIFORMED STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL APPRAISAL PRACTICE ..... 11

SCOPE OF WORK ...................................................................................... 11

DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE ............................................................... 12

PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED ................................................................ 13

DEFINITION OF HIGHEST AND BEST USE ................................................ 13

OTHER DEFINITIONS ................................................................................ 14

LOCATION MAP ......................................................................................... 15

NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS - HILLCREST ................................................ 16

SITE ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 18

SUBJECT PHOTOS .................................................................................... 19

LOCATION ................................................................................................. 24

LEGAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 24

HISTORY OF ACQUISITION ....................................................................... 24

SIZE AND SHAPE ...................................................................................... 24

TOPOGRAPHY ........................................................................................... 24

SOIL .......................................................................................................... 24

TOXIC WASTE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD POTENTIAL ..................... 24

NATURAL, CULTURAL, SCIENTIFIC OR RECREATIONAL VALUE ............... 24

FLOOD AND DRAINAGE ............................................................................ 24

SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ...................................................................... 24



STREET IMPROVEMENTS, ACCESS, AND EXPOSURE .............................. 25

UTILITIES .................................................................................................. 25

ZONING ..................................................................................................... 25

ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 25

EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS ............................................................. 26

PRESENT USE ........................................................................................... 26

FUTURE USE ............................................................................................. 26

DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS ................................................... 27

HIGHEST AND BEST USE .......................................................................... 29

BUILDING DIAGRAM ................................................................................. 30

UNIT SKETCH ............................................................................................ 31

ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP ........................................................................ 32

REALQUEST DATA SHEET ........................................................................ 33

TRANSACTION HISTORY REPORT ............................................................. 34

PROPERTY TAX DETAILS .......................................................................... 35

VALUATION ............................................................................................ 36

SALES COMPARISON APPROACH .............................................................. 37

INCOME APPROACH .................................................................................. 43

RECONCILIATION ...................................................................................... 49

MARKETING/EXPOSURE TIME ................................................................. 51

MARKET DATA ....................................................................................... 52

IMPROVED SALES TRANSACTIONS SUMMARY ......................................... 53

IMPROVED SALES TRANSACTION MAP ..................................................... 54

IMPROVED SALES TRANSACTION PHOTOS .............................................. 55

RENTAL COMPARABLES SUMMARY .......................................................... 68

RENTAL COMPARABLES MAP ................................................................... 69

ADDENDUM ............................................................................................ 75

RENT ROLL .............................................................................................. 76

INCOME & EXPENSE STATEMENT 2015 ................................................... 77

INCOME & EXPENSE STATEMENT 2016 ................................................... 78

QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISER .............................................................. 79

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION



PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL The objective of this appraisal is to estimate the Market Value of the

subject property.

INTENDED USE

The intended use of this appraisal is for estate purposes only. This report is not intended for any other use and must not be relied upon by any other party for any purpose whatsoever.

INTENDED USER The intended user of this appraisal is Kathryn Hattox Trust.

DATE OF VALUE

April 29, 2017

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP

As of the date of this appraisal, the interest of the subject is vested in the name of Kathryn Hattox Trust.

UNIFORMED STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL APPRAISAL PRACTICE

The appraisal report is intended to conform to the requirements of The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) as provided by

the Appraisal Foundation.

SCOPE OF WORK According to USPAP, it is the appraisers’ responsibility to determine the

appropriate amount and type of information researched and the analysis applied in an assignment. Scope of work includes, but is not limited to, the following:

The degree to which the property is inspected or identified;

The extent of research into physical or economic factors that could

affect the property;

The extent of data research; and

The type and extent of analysis applied to arrive at opinions or

conclusions.

Appraisal & Report Type

This is a narrative report intended to include most of the facts and

reasoning that led to the ultimate value estimates.

Property Identification and Inspection

The subject has been identified by its property address and Assessor’s

Parcel Number (APN) in the Site Analysis Section. I inspected the subject

on September 18, 2017. A complete inspection of the subject was made

and photographs were taken.

Analysis of Physical Factors and Economic Factors

All pertinent physical and economic factors were analyzed.

INTRODUCTION



Extent of Data Research

The appraiser maintains a current and comprehensive database of

commercial sales and listings in the San Diego County market area. The

scope of this appraisal involved a market data search in the County of

San Diego. All of the comparables contained in this report are located

within 2 ½ miles of the subject. In addition to market data developed in

the course of previous appraisal work and retained in the appraisers’

work files. Other sources of information include:

CoStar Comps Inc.

LoopNet.com

Public records as reported by RealQuest

Local Real Estate brokers and sales agents

Multiple Listing Service (MLS)

Local and national Real Estate brokerage firms websites

Government and City Websites

Type and Extent of Analysis

Cost Approach:

The Cost Approach is not considered appropriate for this type of property in the current market. Its use is not necessary for a credible appraisal and has not been developed.

Sales Comparison Approach: The Sales Comparison Approach is applicable and necessary and has been fully developed.

Income Approach: The Income Approach is applicable and necessary and has been

fully developed.

Reconciliation of Approaches: A complete review of the approaches to value was made for the

purpose of determining the most reliable valuation technique.

DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE

Market Value is defined as: "The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a

fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus."

Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified

date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: 1) Buyer and seller are typically motivated.

INTRODUCTION



2) Both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what they consider their own best interests.

3) A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market. 4) Payment is made in terms cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial

arrangements comparable thereto. 5) The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold,

unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted

by anyone associated with the sale.1

PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED

The property rights appraised are in fee simple as though free and clear of any encumbrances or liens, as of the above date of value, unless otherwise stated in this report.

Fee Simple Estate may be defined as follows:

"Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate; subject only to the limitations imposed by the government powers of Eminent Domain, Escheat, Police Power and Taxation."

Leased Fee Estate may be defined as follows:

"An ownership interest held by a landlord with the right of use and

occupancy conveyed by lease to others; the rights of lessor or the leased fee owner and leased fee are specified by contract terms

contained within the lease."

Leasehold Estate may be defined as follows:

"The interest held by the lessee (the tenant or renter) through a lease conveying the rights of use and occupancy for a stated term

under certain conditions." 2

DEFINITION OF HIGHEST AND BEST USE

Highest and Best use may be defined as: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately

supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and

maximum profitability."3

1To estimate Market Value as defined by the Federal Register, vol. 55, no. 163, August 22,

1990, pages 34228 and 34229; also quoted in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) Glossary and used by RTC under FIRREA as derived from Title 12

of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1608.

2 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Third Edition, 1993, Appraisal Institute, pgs. 140

& 204

3 The Appraisal of Real Estate, Tenth Edition, 1992, Appraisal Institute, pg. 275-282

INTRODUCTION



Highest and Best Use of land of a site As Though Vacant is:

"Among all reasonable, alternative uses, the use that yields the highest present land value, after payments are made for labor,

capital and coordination. The use of a property based on the assumption that the parcel of land is vacant or can be made vacant by demolishing any improvements."

Highest and Best Use of property as Improved is:

"The use that should be made of a property as it exists. An

existing property should be renovated or retained as is so long as it continues to contribute to the total market value of the property, or

until the return from a new improvement would more than offset the cost of demolishing the existing building and constructing a new one." 4

"An analysis of the highest and best use of a property as improved

may indicate that little or no capital expenditure is required, or it may suggest that significant expenditures are required to convert the property to a different use or to rehabilitate or remodel the

existing use."5

OTHER DEFINITIONS

EXPOSURE TIME may be defined as follows: "The estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have been offered on the

market prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal; a retrospective estimate based upon an analysis of past events assuming a competitive and open market."6

4 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Third Edition, 1993, Appraisal Institute, pg. 171

5 The Appraisal of Real Estate, Tenth Edition, 1992, Appraisal Institute, pg. 285

6 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2006 Edition, pg. 93

INTRODUCTION



LOCATION MAP

INTRODUCTION



NEIGHBORHOOD ANALYSIS - HILLCREST Hillcrest is a small and affluent neighborhood in San Diego, California

northwest of Balboa Park and south of Mission Valley.

GEOGRAPY

Hillcrest is an older neighborhood which has gone through gentrification. Many streets are lined with trees. There are Craftsman homes and Mid-Century

modern apartment buildings. The neighborhood is bounded by Mission Hills to the northwest, Bankers

Hill and Balboa Park to the south, University Heights to the north, and North

Park to the east. A large ridge overlooking San Diego Bay borders the neighborhood to the west.

Hillcrest is part of the Uptown community planning area, which consists of the neighborhoods of Mission Hills, Hillcrest, Bankers Hill, Park West, and University Heights.

DEMOGRAPHICS The 2000 Census showed that the neighborhood's residents had a

median age of 39 and that 49.3% had college degrees. The 2000 Census indicates median family income in 1999 was $61,741 ($80,011 in 2010

inflation adjusted dollars).

ECONOMY

The Hillcrest Business Association has existed since 1921; in 1984 it became a city-approved Business Improvement District. The association supports most beautification projects in the neighborhood, stewards the iconic

Hillcrest sign, organizes street festivals, runs the Hillcrest Farmers Market, and it sponsors the annual "Taste of Hillcrest," which offers food and drink samples

from over 50 local bars and restaurants. The commercial area of Hillcrest is noted for its many restaurants.

Scripps Mercy Hospital and the UC San Diego Medical Center are located here.

TRANSPORTATION Hillcrest is a very walkable neighborhood with cafés, restaurants, and

shops near the main residential pockets. Hillcrest is served by State Route 163 at the University Avenue,

Washington Street and Robinson Avenue exits. University Avenue and Washington Street are the major east-west thoroughfares in Hillcrest; Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Avenues connect Hillcrest to Downtown San Diego through

Park West and Bankers Hill. There is bus service connecting to Downtown as well as to the Mission Valley trolley stops.

Parking is a major concern in the Hillcrest area. The parking shortage is

so acute that the opening of a new 36-space parking lot in June 2010 was front-page news. In an attempt to deal with the parking shortage in Hillcrest,

as well as Mission Hills, Bankers Hill, and other uptown areas, the city council in 1997 created a community parking district. It was initially managed by a local nonprofit organization called the Uptown Partnership, which received a

INTRODUCTION



portion of the income from area parking meters, amounting to about $700,000 per year. The money was supposed to be used to improve parking availability,

traffic circulation, transit effectiveness, and pedestrian mobility. After 12 years and $2.5 million, the Partnership had created only 50 new parking spaces,

leading to criticism from a county Grand Jury and calls from the community to abolish it. The Uptown Partnership withdrew from managing the parking district in 2010.

After several years of inactivity, during which revenue was collected but not spent, the Uptown Community Parking District was revived in 2012 with a new board of directors and a new operations manager. In 2013 the parking

district introduced a free trolley that runs along main streets on Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings. There is also a website, AccessHillcrest, which

helps people find parking spaces, share rides, or bicycle. Hillcrest has been traditionally governed by the 1988 zoning plan,

restricting high rise buildings within its boundaries. Recently the city planners

have revisited this issue, and is moving forward to allow more high density buildings but also have restrictions that parking must be increased and also

emphasize first level retail to any residential building. Although this will add to the density of the neighborhood, additional parking would be helpful if made available to the public.

COMMENTS The subject property is located in an area of other multifamily and single

family residential. This is one of the oldest residential neighborhoods in San Diego and has transitioned to multifamily residential for many years.

SITE ANALYSIS

SITE ANALYSIS



SUBJECT PHOTOS

Front View

Rear view

SITE ANALYSIS



Entry

Courtyard

SITE ANALYSIS



Alley

Street scene, looking south on 3rd Avenue, subject to right

SITE ANALYSIS



Living Room

Kitchen

SITE ANALYSIS



Bathroom

SITE ANALYSIS



LOCATION The subject is located at 3650 3rd Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103.

LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject may be legally described as Lots 19 & 20 Block 10 Tract 596

in the City of San Diego, County of San Diego, State of California.

HISTORY OF ACQUISITION Acquired by Grant Deed dated July 10, 1992 as Document No. 92-

432567. The subject is not presently listed for sale and there have been no known offers to purchase the subject.

SIZE AND SHAPE

The site is rectangular in shape and has 100 feet of frontage on 3rd

Avenue with a depth of 134.95 feet. Total area is estimated at 0.31 acres or

13,495 square feet. Please refer to the Assessor's Parcel Map.

TOPOGRAPHY Topography is generally level at street grade.

SOIL

No detailed soils studies covering the subject property were available to the appraiser; therefore, premises as to soil qualities employed in this report

are not conclusive. I assume there are no geological hazards.

TOXIC WASTE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD POTENTIAL A hazardous study was not provided to the appraiser. This appraiser is

not an expert in the field of hazardous waste detection. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired. This analysis assumes no hazardous

waste contamination of the subject exists.

NATURAL, CULTURAL, SCIENTIFIC OR RECREATIONAL VALUE No natural, cultural, scientific or recreational value was observed on the

site.

FLOOD AND DRAINAGE According to the Flood Insurance Rating Management (FIRM) Map Panel

No. 06073C1885G, dated May 16, 2012, the subject is in an area rated as Zone X. This zone is not considered a flood hazard zone; therefore, insurance is not

required. Based on this information, it is assumed that the subject has adequate drainage.

SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS

The principle seismic considerations for most structures in southern California are surface rupturing of fault traces and damage caused by ground

shaking or seismically induced ground settlement. According to the State of California Earthquake Fault Zones Map (effective May 1, 2003), there are no known faults in the general area of the subject.

SITE ANALYSIS



STREET IMPROVEMENTS, ACCESS, AND EXPOSURE The subject is located on 3rd Avenue which is a side arterial in the

community. Public access is adequate and exposure is adequate. 3rd Avenue is a two lane right-of-way carrying two-way traffic. It is paved

with asphalt concrete and has concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Street and sidewalk surfacing is generally good. Ingress and egress is by curb cuts and appears adequate.

UTILITIES All utilities are available to the subject site including gas, electricity,

water, sewer, telephone, and trash pick up. The cost of utilities in the subject

area is comparable to the rest of San Diego.

ZONING

According to the City of San Diego Planning Department the subject is zoned RM-3-9 which is a Multi-Family Residential Zone. This ordinance allows residential development of one dwelling unit per 600 square feet of lot area.

The subject property meets these requirements with one dwelling unit per 834 square feet of lot area. The off street parking requirements for one bedroom

units is 1.50 spaces per dwelling, for two bedroom units is 2.00 spaces per dwelling, and for three bedroom units is 2.25 spaces per dwelling. Under these requirements at least 29 spaces would be required. The subject has a total of

17 open spaces and therefore does not conform with zoning with regards to the parking requirements. The subject is considered to be a legal non-conforming use of the property. According to The City of San Diego Zoning Department

reconstruction of non-conforming properties is permitted for residential structures when there is a building permit that proves that at one time the

property was legal conforming.

ASSESSMENT Year: 2017

Parcel No.: 452-284-17 Land: $114,049 Improvements: $414,057

Total: $528,106 Taxes: $6,136.56

Status: Current

Taxes are considered reasonable for the property. According to the laws of the state of California, the assessed value cannot be increased more than 2% per year unless a sale of the property (as defined by California law or courts)

takes place or unless new construction takes place. At those times the property will be immediately reassessed and a new tax bill will be issued. Taxes, themselves, are limited to 1% of the "full cash value" except to the extent

to which bonded indebtedness necessitates a higher rate. The subject tax rate is $1.16967/$100.

SITE ANALYSIS



EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS As I have not received a Preliminary Title report, I assume there are no

restrictions or easements that would adversely affect the market value of the subject property.

PRESENT USE The present use of the subject property is an apartment complex.

FUTURE USE

The proposed use of the subject property is likely continuation as improved.

SITE ANALYSIS



DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS The improvements consist of a two story apartment complex described as

follows:

Layout: Two freestanding buildings

Size (Approximate): 8 1br/1ba 7 2br/2ba

1 3br/2ba 16 Total Units SOURCE: Rent Roll & Measurement

Age/Condition: The original building was constructed in 1960 (estimated) and is in average condition for its age.

Construction: Average

EXTERIOR Foundation: Concrete

Walls: Stucco

Roof: Flat with built up rock

Ceiling Height: 8± feet

INTERIOR Floors: Slab with carpet or linoleum over

Doors & Windows: Standard wood pedestrian doors; metal frame casement or louver glass windows

Walls: Drywall

Ceilings: Sprayed acoustic

Plumbing: 1 or 2 restrooms with standard fixtures in each unit,

100 gallon water heater

Lighting: Fluorescent and incandescent lighting

Electrical: Electrical service in subject property considered

adequate

Heating & Air Conditioning:

Ceiling Radiant Heat

SITE ANALYSIS



Kitchen: Four burner electric stove/oven and hood, stainless steel sink, garbage disposal, and refrigerator

Laundry Room: Two washers and two dryers that are owned by the property owners

Extras: Storage lockers in Laundry Room, 1 per unit

Adequacy of Design: Average

Yard Improvements: Plants, trees, and shrubbery

Parking: 17 open spaces (= 1.06/unit)

COMMENTS

The subject has 13,495 square feet of land area and 11,962 square feet of building area which indicates a Land to Building Ratio of 1.13 to 1.

Rents are as follows:

# of Units Type ±SF Rent/Mo.

2 1/1 585 $1,305

1 1/1 585 $1,310

1 1/1 585 $1,315

4 1/1 585 $1,350

2 2/2 812 $1,495

1 2/2 812 $1,545

1 2/2 812 $1,550

3 2/2 812 $1,575

1 3/2 1,086 $1,590

16 11,450 13,035$

RENT ROLL

SITE ANALYSIS



HIGHEST AND BEST USE Highest and Best Use is a basic premise of value, not an absolute fact, it

reflects the appraiser's opinion of the best use of the property based on an analysis of prevailing market conditions.

There are several basic factors that must be considered in order to make a proper determination of Highest and Best Use. The property must be physically capable of the use contemplated. The use must be legal or have

legal adaptability regarding zoning and other restrictions. The use must be profitable and have economic feasibility. The use must be financially feasible with an existing demand for the use contemplated and a market acceptance as

reflected by comparable market transaction.

PHYSICAL CAPABILITY

The subject property is a level site and does not appear to have any physical characteristics that would prohibit redevelopment of this property if it

were vacant as demonstrated by the apartment building that has been on the site for the past 57 years.

LEGAL ADAPTABILITY

The subject property is zoned RM-3-9 and appears to be a legal non-

conforming use of the property as improved.

ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY/DEMAND

The economic feasibility of developing the subject property is somewhat of a moot point since the subject is being appraised as being improved. There would appear to be good demand for apartment as demonstrated by the

marketing time of the sales contained in this report which ranges from 6 ½ months to 10 months.

SUMMARY In your appraiser's opinion, one of the highest and best uses to which

the land could be placed, if vacant, would be its development for multifamily residential.

The existing improvements were constructed approximately 1960. The

property has average appeal and demonstrates average quality construction. As shown in the approaches to value, the improvements add value to the land.

I have concluded that the highest and best use of the subject is as improved.

SITE ANALYSIS



BUILDING DIAGRAM

SITE ANALYSIS



UNIT SKETCH

SITE ANALYSIS



ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP

SITE ANALYSIS



REALQUEST DATA SHEET

SITE ANALYSIS



TRANSACTION HISTORY REPORT

SITE ANALYSIS



PROPERTY TAX DETAILS

VALUATION

VALUATION



Your appraiser has analyzed the subject property value by two approaches. These approaches to value are the Sales Comparison Approach

and the Income Approach. The Cost Approach was considered but felt to be inappropriate for this type of property, as a typical buyer would place no weight

on it due to the age of the improvements. Each approach is discussed below:

SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The Sales Comparison Approach to estimate a value is based on the

principle of substitution that states that a person will not pay more for a property than it will cost to buy a comparable substitute property. When the property being appraised is replaceable in the market, its market value can be

estimated by the cost of purchasing an equally desirable substitute property. The price a typical purchaser pays is usually the result of an extensive

shopping process; consequently, it is important for the appraiser to be informed about the actions of buyers in the marketplace. It is also important to be aware of the actions of sellers, since the price is usually determined by

negotiations between the buyer and the seller in an arms-length transaction. Market Data, when carefully verified and analyzed, is good evidence of market

value because it represents the actions of sellers, purchasers-users, and investors.

The steps in the Sales Comparison Approach involve assembling and

verifying comparable transactions, comparing them to the subject property and adjusting for differences which yield an indicated value conclusion (see grid).

Your appraiser has analyzed over eight market transactions and has

included five transactions in this report upon which my conclusion of market value was partially predicated. These transactions are briefly outlined as

follows:

Market

Data No.Proximity to subject Sale Date # of Units Price/Unit

1 2 1/2 miles northeast 4/2016 20 $180,000

2 2 1/2 miles east 9/2016 21 $186,905

3 2 1/2 miles east 9/2016 16 $210,625

4 2 miles east 2/2017 22 $265,000

5 2 blocks northwest 3/2016 56 $294,643

Subject 16

SUMMARY OF IMPROVED TRANSACTIONS

DISCUSSION OF IMPROVED TRANSACTIONS Market Data No. 1 is located at 3265 Adams Avenue which is 1 ¼ miles

east from the subject. This two story 20 unit apartment complex sold in April 2016 for $180,000 per unit. Amenities include laundry room, storage units,

and fitness center. There are 8 open and 9 one-car garages (= 0.85 parking

VALUATION



spaces per unit). This property is located on a busy street in Normal Heights. This property has slightly superior amenities; however, inferior location,

inferior appeal, slightly inferior age, inferior unit mix, slightly inferior parking compared to the subject and is considered a lower limit of value for the subject.

Market Data No. 2 is located at 3207 – 3211 Meade Avenue which is one mile east from the subject. This two story 21 unit apartment complex sold in September 2016 for $186,905 per unit. There was a $25,000 credit to the

buyer for deferred maintenance. The adjusted sales price is $185,714 per unit. Amenities include laundry room. There are 28 open parking spaces (= 1.33 parking spaces per unit). This property is adjacent to a freeway with freeway

noise in Normal Heights. This property has slightly superior parking and superior age; however, inferior location, inferior appeal, inferior unit mix, and

slightly inferior amenities compared to the subject and is considered a lower limit of value for the subject.

Market Data No. 3 is located at 3752 – 3760 33rd Street which is 1 ½

miles southeast from the subject. This two story 16 unit apartment complex sold in September 2016 for $210,625 per unit. Amenities include laundry

room. There are 3 open, 3 open tandem, and 3 tandem one-car garages (= 1.31 parking spaces per unit). This property is located in North Park. This property has slightly superior age and superior parking; however, inferior location,

inferior appeal, slightly inferior unit mix, and slightly inferior amenities compared to the subject and is considered a lower limit of value for the subject.

Market Data No. 4 is located at 3946 – 3952 Iowa Street which is 1 ¼

miles southeast from the subject. This two story 22 unit apartment complex sold in February 2017 for $265,000 per unit. Amenities include laundry room

and storage spaces. There are 11 open and 6 carport spaces (= 0.77 parking spaces per unit). This property is located in North Park. This property has inferior location, inferior unit mix, and slightly inferior parking; however,

superior condition compared to the subject and is considered a good indication of value for the subject.

Market Data No. 5 is located at 111 West Pennsylvania Avenue which is

two blocks northwest from the subject. This 56 unit apartment complex sold in March 2016 for $294,643 per unit. Amenities include laundry room, fitness

center, clubhouse, and pool. There are 36 open, 14 covered, & 13 covered tandem parking spaces (= 76 total or 1.36 spaces/unit). This property is much larger than the subject and has inferior unit mix; however, superior appeal,

superior condition, superior amenities, and superior parking compared to the subject and is considered an upper limit of value for the subject.

Summary – The above transactions range between $180,000 per unit to $294,643 per unit. The adjusted range as shown on the Adjustment Grid at the end of the Sales Comparison Approach is from $252,750 per unit to

$276,964 per unit or SAY $250,000 per unit to $275,000 per unit. It is your appraiser’s opinion that the value of the subject would fall towards the lower to mid-point of this range at $260,000 per unit.

VALUATION



CONCLUSION After careful consideration and analysis, I have concluded that the

subject property has a Market Value, by the Sales Comparison Approach, of $260,000 per unit.

Price Per Unit

16 UNITS x $260,000/UNIT = $4,160,000

VALUATION



ADJUSTMENT GRID

Subject

CITY Hillcrest

PROXIMITY

SALE DATE

SALES PRICE

SIZE (# OF UNITS) 16

SALES PRICE/UNIT

MARKET COND.

SALES TERMS

ADJ. SP/UNIT

LOCATION average inferior 0.20 inferior 0.20 s inferior 0.05 s inferior 0.03 similar

SIZE (# OF UNITS) 16 20 21 16 22 56 0.05

APPEAL average inferior 0.10 inferior 0.15 inferior 0.15 similar superior -0.03

AGE est. 57 years old 65 yrs 0.01 36 yrs -0.02 29 yrs -0.02 56 yrs 56 yrs

CONDITION average similar similar similar superior -0.10 superior -0.05

UTILITY average similar similar similar similar similar

QUALITY average similar similar similar similar similar

UNIT MIX 8 1/1, 7 2/2, 1 3/2 inferior 0.10 inferior 0.06 s inferior 0.03 inferior 0.06 inferior 0.06

AMENITIES lau rm & stor units s superior -0.02 s inferior 0.03 s inferior 0.03 similar superior -0.05

PARKING 1.06/unit open s inferior 0.04 s superior -0.04 s superior -0.04 s inferior 0.04 s superior -0.04

OTHER none none none none none none

NET ADJ.

0.00

$265,000

0.03

$272,950

4

North Park

2 mi E

2/2017

$5,830,000$3,600,000

$265,000

1620

$180,000

0.00

3/2016

2 1/2 mi E2 1/2 mi NE

22

$3,900,000

$276,964

PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS AND ADJUSTMENTS

$185,714

56

$294,643

0.00

INDICATED VALUE/SF

0.38 -0.06

0.00

0.00

$180,000

0.43

$256,286

1

4/2016 9/2016

2 5

SUMMARY

Normal Heights Normal Heights Hillcrest

2 blk NW

$294,643

$16,500,000

3

North Park

2 1/2 mi E

9/2016

$3,370,000

0.00

$210,625

ADJUSTMENT GRID

0.20

$252,750

0.00

21

$210,625

0.000.00

$257,400

$185,714

0.00

VALUATION



GROSS INCOME MULTIPLIER (GIM) APPROACH

Another method of valuation is the Gross Income Multiplier (GIM) Approach. The GIM is the ratio of the annual rent divided into the selling price. If several similar properties have sold in the market recently, then the

GIM can be computed for those and applied to the anticipated annual rent for the subject property. GIM is useful for rental houses, duplexes, and simple

commercial properties when used as a supplement to other more well developed methods.

The first step under the Gross Income Multiplier Approach is to

determine the market rent that the property would most probably command on the open market as of the effective date of the appraisal. See the Discussion of

Rental Rates in the Income Approach. The Gross Income Multiplier Approach is based on the relationship

between Potential Gross Income and value interpreted in terms of a Gross

Income Multiplier. The Gross Income Multiplier is extracted directly from market sales and applied to a Potential Gross Income projection for the subject property. This appraiser has researched the market for properties similar to

the subject that have sold and for which the Potential Gross Income is known or can be closely estimated. Using the relationship that the Sales Price divided

by the Potential Gross Income equals the Gross Income Multiplier, a Gross Income Multiplier for each sale can be developed.

The Gross Income Multipliers developed from the market transactions in

this report are summarized as follows:

Market

Data No.

Gross

Income

Multiplier

(GIM)

1 16.46

2 13.37

3 14.98

4 12.96

5 14.54

DISCUSSION OF GROSS INCOME MULTIPLIERS (GIMS) The GIM's of the comparables contained in this report ranges from

Market Data No. 4 at 12.96 to Market Data No. 1 at 16.46 which sold with below market rents. The sale closest to the Date of Value of this report is Market Data No. 4 at a 12.96 GIM. According to CoStar Comps GIM's for

multifamily properties sold in 92116, 92103, and 92104 in the year prior to the Date of Value of this report range from 12.98 to 16.46 with an average of

14.66. Broker opinions of GIM's for multifamily in 92103 range from 13.0 to

VALUATION



14.5. I have concluded the market GIM for the subject would be towards the lower end of the range of the sales comparables in this report. I have

concluded a 13.0 GIM for the subject.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, the value conclusion by the GIM is as follows:

13.0 x $338,640 = $4,402,320 or SAY $4,400,000

RECONCILIATION OF APPROACHES

The value conclusion based on the Sales Comparison Approach (price per unit) is $4,160,000 and the value conclusion based on the Gross Income Multiplier is $4,400,000. Placing equal weight on each of these approaches to

value, I have concluded that the market value indication by the reconciliation of the Sales Comparison Approach of $4,280,000 is reasonable for the subject

property. Value via the Sales Comparison Approach SAY $4,280,000

VALUATION



INCOME APPROACH The Income Approach to value relates the purchase price to the

anticipated Net Income which will provide a return on and of the total investment over the remaining economic life of the income producing property.

The first step under the Income Approach is to determine the market rent that the property would most probably command on the open market as of the effective date of the appraisal. Your appraiser has collected rental

comparables which are located in the subject neighborhood and are highly competitive with the subject property. Services provided vary and some are basically the same as the subject property. Each rental comparable was

carefully inspected to evaluate the comparability. This analysis results in the projected Annual Gross Income from which is deducted an allowance for

vacancy and collection loss. The result is called Effective Gross Income (EGI). The fixed, operating and reserve expenses are deducted resulting in the anticipated Net Operating Income (NOI). The Net Operating Income is

converted into an estimate of value by means of an Overall Capitalization Rate (OAR) that has been extracted from the market.

The Rental Rate, Vacancy/Collection Loss, Expenses, and Overall Capitalization Rate are discussed for the subject as follows:

To compare the income stream with actual rents to market rents, your

appraiser analyzed the rental rate for the subject property based on market rental comparables. Please refer to the Rental Comparables in the Market Data section of this report. These rents are summarized as follows:

Rent

Comp No.

Age in

YearsUnit Type Rent/Month

R-1 56 1/1 $1,330

2/2 $1,695

R-2 60 1/1 $1,695

2/2 $2,225

3/2 $2,795

R-3 44 1/1 $1,885

2/2 $2,315

R-4 60 3/2 $2,495

R-5 70 3/1 $2,680

DISCUSSION OF RENTAL RATES

Overall the current market rent in 92103 range, depending on unit size, appeal, and location, from $1,330 per month to $1,885 per month for one bedroom units, $1,695 per month to $2,315 per month for two bedroom units,

and $2,495 per month to $2,795 per month for three bedroom units.

VALUATION



Rental Comparable No. 1 is located at 4166 4th Avenue which is ½ mile north from the subject. The one bedroom units are 600 SF (compared to the

subject at 585 SF) and rent for $1,330 per month. The two bedroom units are 800 SF (compared to the subject at 812 SF) and rent for $1,695 per month.

Common amenities include laundry facilities, elevator, and pool. This property has superior amenities; however, inferior appeal and location compared to the subject. This is considered a lower limit of rent for the subject's one and two

bedroom units. Rental Comparable No. 2 is located at 1707 Essex Street which is one

mile east from the subject. The one bedroom units are 650 SF and rent for

$1,695 per month. The two bedroom units are 990 SF and rent for $2,225 per month. The three bedroom units are 1,175 SF (compared to the subject at

1,086 SF) and rent for $2,795 per month. Unit amenities include dishwashers, fireplaces, balconies/patios, and garage parking. Common amenities include laundry facilities and pool/spa. This property has superior appeal, superior

amenities, and superior unit size compared to the subject. This is considered an upper limit of rent for the subject's units.

Rental Comparable No. 3 is located at 111 West Pennsylvania Avenue which is two blocks northwest from the subject. The one bedroom units are 600 SF and rent for $1,885 per month. The two bedroom units are 900 SF and

rent for $2,315 per month. Unit amenities include dishwashers and balconies. Common amenities include elevator, laundry facilities, fitness center, and pool. This property has superior appeal and superior amenities compared to the

subject. This is considered an upper limit of rent for the subject's one and two bedroom units.

Rental Comparable No. 4 is located at 4053 8th Avenue which is ½ mile northeast from the subject. The three bedroom units are 1,250 SF and rent for $2,495 per month. Unit amenities include dishwashers and two underground

parking spaces. Common amenities include laundry facilities. This property has superior unit size and superior parking; however, inferior appeal compared to the subject. This is considered a good indication of rent for the subject's

three bedroom unit. Rental Comparable No. 5 is located at 3946 5th Avenue which is ¼ mile

north from the subject. The three bedroom units are 1,256 SF and rent for $2,680 per month. Unit amenities include fireplaces, laundry hookups, and 1 parking space. This property has superior appeal, superior unit size, and

superior location compared to the subject. This is considered an upper limit of rent for the subject's three bedroom unit.

Summary – None of the apartment complexes in the subject area are offering rental concessions at this time. The subject's one bedroom units are rented for between $1,305 per month and $1,350 per month, the two bedroom

units are rented for between $1,495 per month and $1,575 per month, and the three bedroom unit is rented for $1,590 per month. It appears that the subject's actual rents are below the rental market as indicated by the Rental

Comparables. I have concluded a Market Rent of $1,600 for the one bedroom units, $1,800 for the two bedroom units, and $2,500 for the three bedroom

VALUATION



units. The subject property has a laundry room available to the tenants. Based

on your appraiser's experience, a $10 to $30 per unit laundry allowance is typical depending on unit mix. The subject is half one bedroom units and

approximately half two bedroom unit with one three bedroom unit; therefore, a laundry income of $20 per unit was accepted in this analysis.

VACANCY AND COLLECTION LOSS

The market has been good in San Diego for apartment complexes in the last year and it will likely remain good for years to come as discussed in the Highest

and Best Use. The vacancy rates for the rental comparables contained in this report are outlined as follows:

Rent

Comp.

No.

Vacancy (%)

R-1 2.38%

R-2 3.92%

R-3 3.57%

R-4 n/a

R-5 14.28%

According to a study by Kidder Mathews First Quarter 2017 San Diego

County Multifamily Report, the San Diego County multifamily residential

vacancy was about 4.0% at the end of the 1st Quarter 2017. Most brokers use a 5% vacancy factor for their proforma of the income and expenses.

A 5% vacancy and collection loss factor is considered fair and reasonable

for the subject in this area due to tenant turnover and collection loss over the economic life of the improvements.

EXPENSES End of Year 2015 and 2016 were requested and received. To analyze the

expenses of the subject property, current normal expenses were found in the market and applied to that of the subject. Adjustments were made as applicable.

VALUATION



ACTUAL ACTUAL APPRAISER

2015 2016 ESTIMATE

INCOME

Rental Income $245,924 $242,474 $334,800

Laundry $0 $0 $3,840

Gross Scheduled Income $245,924 $242,474 $338,640

Vacancy and Collection Loss 5% $12,296 $12,124 $16,932

Effective Gross Income $233,628 $230,350 $321,708

EXPENSES

Real Estate Taxes $6,002 $6,092 $52,000

Taxes and License $247 $247 $250

Property Insurance $4,237 $4,119 $4,200

Utilities $10,692 $11,725 $12,000

Trash Removal $2,942 $2,971 $3,000

Pest Control $804 $829 $1,200

Maintenance and Repairs $7,547 $16,821 $16,900

Off-Site Management $24,332 $26,535 $16,900

On-Site Management $10,800

Reserves $3,200

Total Expenses $56,803 $69,339 $120,450

Expenses of $7,528 per unit or 37.44% of Effective Gross Income is

reasonable.

Real estate taxes are based on value of $4,470,000 with a tax rate of

1.16967 per $100 of assessed value or $52,000 per year.

Taxes and License is actual which appears reasonable.

Actual Property Insurance is $250 per unit and appears reasonable.

Actual Utilities is $750 per unit and appears reasonable.

Actual Trash removal is $188 per unit and appears reasonable.

Actual Pest control is $75 per unit and appears reasonable.

The Profit & Loss Statement has a category labeled Payroll Expenses

which is Off-Site and On-Site Management combined. Appraiser Estimate for Off-Site Management is 5% of Effective Gross Annual

Income and for On-Site Management is ½ off rent at $1,800 per month is $10,800 annually which equals $27,700 ($10,800 + $16,900) for a Payroll Expense Category. This appears reasonable.

Actual 2016 Maintenance and Repairs was $16,821 but included non-reoccurring rehabilitation (new windows, flooring, cabinets, fixtures, etc).

Maintenance using in Appraisers Estimate is 5% of Effective Gross Annual Income.

Reserves are $200/unit.

Market Data No. 1 had a reported expense ratio of 39.36% which appears reasonable. Market Data No. 2 had a reported expense ratio of 35.90% which

VALUATION



appears reasonable. Market Data No. 3 had a reported expense ratio of 36.59% which appears reasonable. Market Data No. 4 had a reported expense ratio of

36.31% which appears reasonable. Market Data No. 5 had a reported expense ratio of 33.25% which appears reasonable. The subject's 2015 actual expense

ratio was 24.31% which appears low due to a very low reported Maintenance and Repairs. 2016 actual expense ratio was 30.10% which appears reasonable; however, the Maintenance and Repairs are higher. The projected

expense ratio is 37.44% which falls within the range of the comparables and falls within the expected range based on your appraiser's experience.

OVERALL CAPITALIZATION RATE (OAR)

Direct capitalization is based on the relationship between Net Income

and value interpreted in terms of an Overall Rate. The Overall Rate is extracted directly from market sales and applied to a Net Income projection for the subject property. This appraiser has researched the market for properties

similar to the subject that have sold and for which the Net Income is known or can be closely estimated. Using the relationship that Net Income divided by Sales Price equals Overall Rate, an Overall Rate for each sale can be developed.

The Overall Rates developed from the market transactions in this report are summarized as follows:

Market

Data No.

Overall Rate

(OAR)

1 3.66%

2 4.42%

3 4.00%

4 4.53%

5 4.25%

The OAR of the comparables contained in this report ranges from Market Data No. 1 at 3.66% (which sold with below market rents) to Market Data No. 4

at 4.53%. The sale closest to the Date of Value of this report is Market Data No. 4 at a 4.53% OAR. According to CoStar Comps OAR's for multifamily properties sold in 92116, 92103, and 92104 in the year prior to the Date of

Value of this report range from 3.38% to 4.81% with an average of 4.13%. Broker opinions of OAR's for multifamily in 92103 range from 4.00% to 5.00%. I have concluded the market OAR for the subject would be towards the upper

end of the range of the sales comparables in this report. I have concluded a 4.50% OAR.

CONCLUSION Thus, the Income Approach can be computed as follows:

VALUATION



8 UNITS X $1,600 /UNIT X 12 = $153,600

7 UNITS X $1,800 /UNIT X 12 = $151,200

1 UNIT X $2,500 /UNIT X 12 = $30,000

Laundry = $3,840

GROSS SCHEDULED INCOME $338,640

Less Vacancy and Collection Loss 5.00% $16,932

EFFECTIVE GROSS INCOME $321,708

Less Expenses 37.44% approximate $120,450

NET OPERATING INCOME (NOI) $201,258

CAPITALIZED AT 4.50% $4,472,400

Value via the Income Approach SAY $4,470,000

VALUATION



RECONCILIATION The indicated values by the two approaches utilized in this report have

been brought forward:

SALES COMPARISON APPROACH $4,280,000 INCOME APPROACH $4,470,000

The strength and weaknesses of each approach are set forth below with consideration given to the purpose of the report, reliability of the approach, quantity and quality of the data, methods used, and the importance and

acceptability of the approach by typical apartment buyers and sellers.

SALES COMPARISON APPROACH RECONCILIATION

The Sales Comparison Approach was based on the analysis of five comparable transactions located in the 92116, 92103, and 92104 areas. This

is a meaningful analysis when the comparables can be directly related to the subject property without making unreasonable adjustments that cannot be supported with market evidence.

A typical buyer purchases properties in the subject area after an extensive shopping process. Under the Definition of Market Value in this

report, it seems logical that this approach could indicate market value since it could possibly reflect the thinking of typical apartment buyers and sellers.

Comparable improved sales data utilized in this approach are considered

reliable and adequate for this analysis. This was felt to be a fair method of valuation for the subject property. This approach was, therefore, given little

weight in the final analysis.

INCOME APPROACH RECONCILIATION

The Income Approach is most applicable in the appraisal of income producing properties that are typically bought and sold based upon their investment characteristics. It can be the best indicator if the income and

expenses are estimated accurately, the Capitalization Rate is correct, and the proper techniques and methods have been used without mathematical error.

There were several similar and competitive properties plus subject actual rent to enable a reasonably accurate estimate of market rent to be made. The allowance for vacancy and collection loss was well supported with recent data

and discussions with knowledgeable real estate personnel in the area. The expenses were estimated from comparable properties, my past experience, and recent published data from various services.

The Overall Capitalization Rate selected was considered reliable since it was drawn from comparable sale properties sharing similar investment

characteristics at market. Furthermore, the method used in estimating this rate was market derived and did not require arbitrary judgments. Since this approach was based upon an analysis of reliable data appropriately processed

and subject is rented, it has been given most weight in the final analysis.

VALUATION



FINAL ANALYSIS - CONCLUSION A complete review of the approaches to value was made for the purpose

of determining the most reliable valuation technique. The final value estimate is the blending of factors to which the typical investor would give most

consideration, namely the quality and quantity of available data as derived by comparable sale properties. The indication by the Income Approach is the most reliable due to the typical apartment investor buyer’s motives and the

sufficient data obtained in processing this approach; therefore, it was given most weight.

Based on all the foregoing data analysis, it is the opinion of your

appraiser that the Market Value of the subject property as of April 29, 2017, is:

$4,470,000

(FOUR MILLION FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS)

VALUATION



MARKETING/EXPOSURE TIME Marketing period means the amount of time necessary to achieve an

open market sale of the property under current market conditions and market trends, assuming normal market exposure and the consummation of a sale

consistent with the terms and conditions of the FDIC definition of market value. Marketing period is not to be confused with absorption period or holding period.

Under Standard Rule 1-2B of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, appraisers are required to comment on the estimate of exposure time linked to the market value estimate. Within Statement 6,

published by the Appraisal Standards Board, exposure time is defined as being the estimated length of time the property interest being appraised would have

been offered in the market place prior to the hypothetical consummation of a sale at market value on the effective date of the appraisal.

Marketing time for the comparables contained in this report are as

follows:

Market

Data

No.

Marketing Time

1 6 1/2 months

2 10 months

3 n/a

4 8 months

5 n/a

The above comparables have marketing times that range from 6 ½

months to ten months. I have concluded a marketing time of less than 12 months for the subject. The exposure time would have also been the same at the concluded market value.

MARKET DATA

MARKET DATA



Market

Data

No.

Location Sale Date# of

Units

Price &

Price/UnitGIM OAR

1 3265 Adams Avenue 4/25/2016 20 $3,600,000 16.46 3.66%

San Diego, CA 92116 $180,000

2 3207-3211 Meade Ave. 9/16/2016 21 $3,925,000 13.37 4.42%

San Diego, CA 92116 $186,905

3 3752-3760 33rd Ave. 9/9/2016 16 $3,370,000 14.98 4.00%

San Diego, CA 92104 $210,625

4 3946-3952 Iowa Street 2/16/2017 22 $5,830,000 12.96 4.53%

San Diego, CA 92104 $265,000

5 111 W. Pennsylvania Ave. 3/28/2016 56 $16,500,000 14.54 4.25%

San Diego, CA 92103 $294,643

IMPROVED SALES TRANSACTIONS SUMMARY

MARKET DATA



IMPROVED SALES TRANSACTION MAP

MARKET DATA



IMPROVED SALES TRANSACTION PHOTOS

1

2

MARKET DATA



3

4

MARKET DATA



5

MARKET DATA



17-011

MARKET DATA NO. 1

LOCATION: 3265 Adams Avenue, San Diego, CA 92116

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (Ex W 3 ft) Lot 4 and all of Lot 3 Block 38 Tract 985

SITE SIZE: 12,998 square feet

SHAPE: Rectangular

TOPOGRAPHY: Generally level at street grade

ZONE: CU-3-3, Central Urbanized Commercial allowing Multifamily Residential

UTILITIES: All are available to the site

STREETS: All are in to the site

IMPROVEMENTS: Two story, 20 unit, stucco apartment complex. 12,038± SF. 65 years old in average condition. Amenities include

laundry room, storage units, and fitness center. 8 open and 9 1-car garages (= 0.85 spaces/unit).

UNIT MIX: 10 Studio units 6 One bedroom one bath units

4 Two bedroom one bath units

TRANSACTION: Grant Deed Recorded: 4/25/2016

Document No.: 16-0191898 DTT: $3,960.00, Full Value

SALES PRICE: $3,600,000 or $180,000 per unit

TERMS: 25.0% down, 1st Plaza Bank, $2,700,000

EXPOSURE TIME: 6 ½ months

CONFIRMED BY: Raymond Choi, Marcus & Millichap, 9/29/2017, (858) 373-3136

MARKET DATA



SELLER: Joseph F Benedict

BUYER: Fenway Properties I LLC

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 439-432-36

COMMENTS: Located on a busy commercial street.

Reportedly sold at a 16.46 Gross Income Multiplier and 3.66% Overall Rate. Land to Building Ratio is 1.08 to 1.

MARKET DATA



17-011

MARKET DATA NO. 2

LOCATION: 3207 – 3211 Meade Avenue, San Diego, CA

92116

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcels A & B Per MP 349 in MP 1445 & in

ST CLSD & in Lots 2 thru Lot 6 Tract 1478


SHAPE: Irregular


ZONE: RS-1-7, Residential-Single Unit




laundry room. 28 open parking spaces (= 1.33 spaces/unit).

UNIT MIX: 1 Studio unit

14 One bedroom one bath units 6 Two bedroom one bath units

TRANSACTION: Grant Deed Recorded: 9/16/2016 Document No.: 16-0490864

DTT: $4,317.50, Full Value


TERMS: All cash to seller

EXPOSURE TIME: 10 months

CONFIRMED BY: Ray Adams, Cushman & Wakefield,

9/29/2017, (858) 546-5456

SELLER: Cassolato Anne W Trust

MARKET DATA



BUYER: WSC Investment Partners, LLC


COMMENTS: Located adjacent to a freeway on a busy street; however, down an estimated 50±

foot driveway behind other properties with street frontage. $25,000 credit to buyer for deferred maintenance. $3,925,000 -

$25,000 = $3,900,000 or $185,714 per unit. Reportedly sold at a 13.37 Gross Income Multiplier and 4.42% Overall Rate.

Land to Building Ratio is 1.79 to 1.

MARKET DATA



17-011

MARKET DATA NO. 3

LOCATION: 3752 – 3760 33rd Street, San Diego, CA

92104

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 33 thru 36 Block 51 Tract 438


SHAPE: Rectangular


ZONE: RM-2-5, Multifamily Residential



IMPROVEMENTS: Two story, 16 unit, stucco apartment

complex. 9,982± SF. 29 years old in average condition. Amenities include laundry room. 3 open, 3 open tandem, 6

tandem garages = 21 total spaces (= 1.31 spaces/unit).

UNIT MIX: 8 One bedroom one bath units

6 Two bedroom one bath units 2 Two bedroom two bath units

TRANSACTION: Grant Deed Recorded: 9/9/2016 Document No.: 16-0474047



TERMS: 34.7% down, 1st JP Morgan Chase Bank, $2,200,000

EXPOSURE TIME: n/a

CONFIRMED BY: Thomas McMartin, Marcus & Millichap, 9/29/2017, (858) 373-3196

MARKET DATA



SELLER: DiMi Group LLC

BUYER: C & C University LLC

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 446-492-22 & -23

COMMENTS: Located on a quiet street with other

apartments. Reportedly sold at a 14.98 Gross Income Multiplier and 4.00% Overall Rate. Land to Building Ratio is

0.61 to 1.

MARKET DATA



17-011

MARKET DATA NO. 4

LOCATION: 3946 – 3952 Iowa Street, San Diego, CA

92104

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 35 thru 38 Block 209 Tract

LP0008PG


SHAPE: Rectangular


ZONE: RM-3-9, Multifamily Residential




laundry room and storage units. 11 open and 6 carport spaces (= 0.77 spaces/unit).

UNIT MIX: 18 One bedroom one bath units

4 Two bedroom one bath units

TRANSACTION: Grant Deed

Recorded: 2/16/2017 Document No.: 17-0078347 DTT: $6,413.00, Full Value


TERMS: 54.0% down, 1st First Foundation Bank,

$2,680,000

EXPOSURE TIME: 8 months

CONFIRMED BY: Kip Malo, JLL, 9/29/2017, (858) 410-1200

SELLER: North Park Apartments San Diego, LP

MARKET DATA



BUYER: Leann Van Langen Trust


COMMENTS: Located on a quiet street with other apartments and single family residences.

Reportedly sold at a 12.96 Gross Income Multiplier and 4.53% Overall Rate. Land to Building Ratio is 1.15 to 1.

MARKET DATA



17-011

MARKET DATA NO. 5

LOCATION: 111 West Pennsylvania Avenue, San

Diego, CA 92103

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1 Tract 621


SHAPE: Rectangular


ZONE: RS-1-7, Residential-Single Unit and OR-1-1, Open Space-Residential



IMPROVEMENTS: Three story, 56 unit, stucco apartment complex. 36,350± SF. 43 years old in average condition. Amenities include

laundry room, fitness center, clubhouse, and pool. 36 open, 14 covered, & 13 covered tandem parking spaces (= 76 total

or 1.36 spaces/unit).

UNIT MIX: 2 Studio units

44 One bedroom one bath units 10 Two bedroom two bath units

TRANSACTION: Grant Deed

Recorded: 3/28/2016 Document No.: 16-0139142



TERMS: 66% down, 1st MUFG Union Bank,

$5,640,000

EXPOSURE TIME: n/a

CONFIRMED BY: James Neil, CBRE, 9/29/2017, (858) 369-

MARKET DATA



3083

SELLER: KMF Park East, LLC

BUYER: E & B Ranch Properties, LLC


COMMENTS: Located in a quiet cul de sac with other apartments. Reportedly sold at a 14.54 Gross Income Multiplier and 4.25%

Overall Rate. Land to Building Ratio is 1.05 to 1.

MARKET DATA



Rental

Comp.

No.

Location Unit Type Rent / Month

R-1 4166 4th Avenue 1/1 $1,330

San Diego, CA 92103 2/1 $1,695

R-2 1707 Essex Street 1/1 $1,695

San Diego, CA 92103 2/2 $2,225

3/2 $2,795

R-3 111 W. Pennsylvania Ave. 1/1 $1,885

San Diego, CA 92103 2/2 $2,315

R-4 4053 8th Avenue 3/2 $2,495

San Diego, CA 92103

R-5 3946 5th Avenue 3/1 $2,680

San Diego, CA 92103

RENTAL COMPARABLES SUMMARY

MARKET DATA



RENTAL COMPARABLES MAP

MARKET DATA



17-011

RENTAL COMPARABLE NO. R-1

TYPE: Apartment

BUILDING NAME: Hilltop Terrace Apartments

LOCATION: 4166 4th Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103

DESCRIPTION: Three story, 42 unit, 19,476± square foot, stucco apartment

complex, 56± years old and in average condition. Common amenities include laundry facilities, elevator, and pool. Adequate parking spaces.

CONFIRMED BY: RA Snyder Properties, 9/29/2017, (619) 436-4542

COMMENTS: Located with other apartments in a medical area of the

community. Water and sewer included in the rent. Vacancy is 2.38%.

Rental Data

BR / BA Size in SF Rent/Mo. Term in Years

1/1 600 $1,330 MtM 2/2 800 $1,695 MtM

MARKET DATA



17-011


TYPE: Apartment

BUILDING NAME: Park Diplomat Apartments

LOCATION: 1707 Essex Street, San Diego, CA 92103

DESCRIPTION: Two story over parking, 51 unit, stucco apartment complex,

60± years old and in average condition. Unit amenities include dishwashers, fireplaces, balconies/patios, and garage parking. Common amenities include laundry

facilities and pool/spa. Adequate open, covered, and garage spaces.

CONFIRMED BY: Sunrise Management, 9/29/2017, (844) 730-8972

COMMENTS: Located with other apartments in a quiet area. Water and sewer included in the rent. Vacancy is 3.92%.

Rental Data


1/1 650 $1,695 MtM 2/2 990 $2,225 MtM

3/2 1,175 $2,795 MtM

MARKET DATA



17-011


TYPE: Apartment

BUILDING NAME: Park East Apartments

LOCATION: 111 West Pennsylvania Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103

DESCRIPTION: Three story, 56 unit, 36,350± square foot, stucco apartment

complex, 44± years old and in average condition. Unit amenities include dishwashers and balconies. Common amenities include elevator, laundry facilities, fitness center,

and pool. Adequate open and covered spaces.

CONFIRMED BY: Sunrise Management, 9/29/2017, (844) 730-8972

COMMENTS: Located with other apartments in a quiet area. Water and sewer included in the rent. Vacancy is 3.57%.

Rental Data


1/1 600 $1,885 MtM 2/2 900 $2,315 MtM

MARKET DATA



17-011


TYPE: Apartment

BUILDING NAME: Melrose Canyon Community


DESCRIPTION: Two and three story, 52 unit, stucco apartment complex,

estimated 60± years old and in average condition. Unit amenities include dishwashers, and two underground parking spaces. Common amenities include laundry

facilities.

CONFIRMED BY: On-Site Manager, 9/29/2017, (619) 297-0269

COMMENTS: Located on a quiet cul de sac with some canyon views. Water and sewer included in the rent.

Rental Data


3/2 1,250 $2,495 MtM

MARKET DATA



17-011


TYPE: Apartment

BUILDING NAME: Fifth Avenue Apartments


DESCRIPTION: Two story, 7 unit, red brick mixed use, ground floor clothing

retail with apartments upstairs, estimated 70± years old and in average condition. Unit amenities include fireplaces, laundry hookups, and 1 parking space.

CONFIRMED BY: Carleton Management, 9/29/2017, (858) 613-1000

COMMENTS: Located in the heart of Hillcrest one a busy, main

commercial street. Water and sewer included in the rent. Vacancy is 14.28%.

Rental Data


3/1 1,256 $2,680 MtM

ADDENDUM

ADDENDUM



RENT ROLL

ADDENDUM



INCOME & EXPENSE STATEMENT 2015

ADDENDUM



INCOME & EXPENSE STATEMENT 2016

ADDENDUM



STEVEN L. BOWEN, MAI

QUALIFICATIONS OF APPRAISER

CERTIFIED GENERAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER #AG002842, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

EDUCATION

1973 – Present Real Estate/Appraisal Courses:

Fair Lending and the Appraiser Standards of Professional Practice Risk Analysis

Subdivision Analysis Litigation Valuation

Condemnation Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation Valuation Analysis and Report Writing

Industrial Valuation Capitalization Theory and Techniques Basic Appraisal Principles

Single Family Residential Appraisal Real Estate Principles

Legal Aspects of Real Estate Principles of Real Estate Appraisal Real Estate Finance

Real Estate Practice Real Estate Economics

Real Estate Brokers Course Real Estate Salesman Course

1970 B.S. Degree - San Diego State University

1958 – 1965 Graduated other grades in San Diego, California EXPERIENCE

1973 – Present Independent Fee Appraiser 1975 – 1977 Real Estate Broker DBA Steven L. Bowen & Associates

1974 – 1975 Real Estate Salesman 1973 University Teacher in Korea for Business Investors &

Professionals

1972 – 1973 County of San Diego, Administrative Assistant 1970 – 1972 United States Army

STEVEN L. BOWEN & ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS/CONSULTANTS

9522 SELTZER COURT, SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-3248 TELEPHONE (858) 571-9000 FAX (858) 571-9003 E-Mail: [email protected] Web Site: www.sandiegoappraisers.com

ADDENDUM



PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS/POSITIONS

Appraisal Institute

Currently hold MAI and SRA Designations (Life Member) MAI Designation 1983 President of San Diego Chapter 1987

Recreation Committee Chairman 2004 - 2006 National & Regional Activities

Review and Counseling Division - San Diego Chairman 1988 – 1997 Admissions Committee 1984 – Present

Society of Real Estate Appraisers

SRPA Designation 1981

SRA Designation 1981

Director 1983/84 and 1984/85 Admissions Committee 1984/86

The Appraisal Foundation

National Activities

Member - Appraisal Standards Board Special Task Force 1996 Member - Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Issues

Resource Panel (to rewrite USPAP) 1997 – 1998 National Association of Realtors

San Diego Board of Realtors - Realtor Member San Diego Multiple Listing Service

TYPES OF PROPERTY APPRAISED

Commercial, Service Stations, Multiple Family Dwellings, Rural Land, Office

Buildings, Shopping Centers, Retail, Industrial, High Rises, Raw Land, Wetlands, Master Planned Communities, Golf Courses, Ranches, Auto

Dealerships, Hotels/Motels, Leasehold Interests, Subdivisions, Easements, TV Stations, Single Family Residences, Special Use Properties & Eminent Domain.

OTHER QUALIFICATIONS

Instructional - California Community College Teaching Credentials in

Real Estate Expert Witness - Testified on real estate values in Superior Court in San Diego

and Los Angeles and Federal District Bankruptcy Court in San Diego &

Arbitration

ADDENDUM



SOME MORE IMPORTANT ASSIGNMENTS FOR THIS APPRAISER

FEDERAL AGENCIES

Bankruptcy Court of San Diego Bureau of Internal Revenue Service

Federal Asset Disposition Association Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Federal National Mortgage Association

General Services Administration H.U.D.

U.S. Department of the Navy U.S. Postal Service U.S. Department of Fish & Wildlife

STATE, COUNTY, & CITY California Department of Transportation

California Department of Fish & Game Centre City Development Corporation City of Chula Vista

City of El Cajon City of La Mesa

City of National City City of Oceanside City of San Diego

County of San Diego

Oceanside Wastewater District Grossmont Union High School

Lakeside Water District North County Transit Ramona Unified School District

San Diego Housing Commission San Diego Metropolitan Development

Board Solana Beach School District San Diego Unified Port District

Wildlife Conservation Board

AUTO & TRANSPORTATION RELATED

Arizona Eastern & Pacific Railroad

Carlsbad Volvo Classic Motors Auto Agency Chrysler Credit Corporation

Chevron Oil Corporation Dixon Ford Auto Agency

Escondido Acura Exxon Oil Company Fairway Cadillac Auto Dealership

Grihalva Chevrolet Kearny Mesa Dodge La Mesa RV Center

Mobil Oil Company

Quality Chevrolet

Pacific Honda Padre Dodge San Diego Volvo

Santa Fe Railroad. Inc. Shell Oil Company

Southern Pacific Transportation Co. Sunroad Mitsubishi Terry Allen Datsun Auto Agency

Texaco Oil Company Thrifty Oil Company UNOCAL

Westcott Volvo

ADDENDUM



BANKS, MORTGAGE, LIFE INSURANCE, & LENDING INSTITUTIONS

American First Mortgage American Thrift Savings & Loan

American Savings Bank American United Life Insurance Co. Bank of America

Bank of Commerce Bank of Hong Kong Bank of Southern California

Bank of the West Benefit Savings

California Commerce Bank Center Bank Continental Bank

County Savings Bank Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank

Eastern Savings Bank Fidelity Federal First Charter Bank

First Commercial Bank First Interstate Bank First National Mortgage

Glendale Federal Savings & Loan GMAC Commercial Mortgage

Great Western Bank Home Federal Savings & Loan Indianapolis Life Insurance Co.

Independent Bank La Jolla Bank & Trust Co.

Lafayette Life Insurance Co. Mellon Bank

Money Store National Security Mortgage Co. Nations Bank

Nationwide Life Insurance Co. New Life Assurance Company Old Stone Bank

Pacific Commerce Bank Provident Bank

Rancho Funding San Diego County Credit Union San Diego National Bank

Santa Barbara Savings & Loan Sanwa Bank

Southwest Bank Southern Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co.

Sun Life Assurance Company Union Bank of California Union Central Life Insurance

U. S. Mortgage Company Valley Federal Savings

Wells Fargo Bank Western Financial Westlands Bank

Weyerhauser

ATTORNEYS

Jack Brumley, Attorney Tim Cohelan, Attorney Richard Edwards, Attorney

Luce, Forward, Hamilton, & Scripps Paul Geitner, Attorney

Richard Gore, Attorney Daniel Grindle, Attorney Thomas Harnsberger, Attorney

Lionel P. Hernholm Jr., Attorney William Hinchy, Attorney William Houts, Attorney

Andrew Wagner, Attorney

Hunter & Ryan, Attorneys Lesh & Lesh, Attorneys Bernard Levy, Attorney

Michael K. Marlow, Attorney Nelson Millsberg, Attorney

Tom Murphy, Attorney Jeffrey Patterson, Attorney Pederson Law Office

A.L. Renick, Attorney Thomas Ryan, Attorney Stan Smith, Attorney

ADDENDUM



MISCELLANEOUS Barona Road Christmas Tree Farm

Boney's Market Bonita Professional Plaza Brentwood Mobile Home Park

Cabrillo Theater Channel 6 TV Chicago Title Insurance Co.

Clairemont Traffic Court Coronado Hospital

Commonwealth & Title Insurance Co. Executive Complex Highrise/Hotel Fireman's Fund Insurance

Granger Office Building Girard Medical Building

Holsum Bakery Hyatt Regency Hotel Inn at La Jolla, et. al..

Irish Oaks Horse Ranch Kaiser Cement Co. KOGO TV

La Jolla Village Hotel La Mesa Racquetball Club

Linda Vista Shopping Center Nelson & Sloan Sand & Gravel Otay Industrial Park

Pacific Telephone Co.

Pacific Drive-in Theatre Payne Industrial Park Promontory Business Park

Rancho San Diego Assessment District Rancho Santa Fe Village Square Shopping Center

Rancho Santa Fe Association Regency Plaza Hotel

Rick Engineering Safeco Title Insurance Company San Diego Gas & Electric Company

San Dieguito Engineering Sandford Hotel/Senior Center

Sheraton Inn St. Charles Monastery St. Paul Title Insurance Company

Sunbow Master Planned Community Sunroad Pacific Plaza Sweetwater Plaza Shopping Center

Title Insurance & Trust Company U. S. Elevator

United Cerebral Palsy Woodward Sand Company

APPRAISAL FOR: KATHRYN HATTOX TRUST PROPERTY …€¦ · San Diego, CA 92107 Re: Appraisal of...

Documents

Transcript of APPRAISAL FOR: KATHRYN HATTOX TRUST PROPERTY …€¦ · San Diego, CA 92107 Re: Appraisal of...